Hidden Ladders

Something founders often say to me is: 

"It feels like the same founders keep winning funding."

The same names appear in accelerator programs.
Then they show up as winners (or finalists) in innovation prizes.
Then again in larger grant announcements.

At first it can look like those founders are simply better connected. But when you spend enough time inside funding programs, you start to notice something else. Many of those founders aren’t jumping straight to the big opportunities.

They’re moving through a series of smaller ones first.

Here's a structured example

Recently I was looking at the European Prize for Women Innovators. It’s a high-profile award recognising women building breakthrough companies across Europe. But what caught my attention wasn’t just the founders themselves. It was how the prize was structured.

Instead of one category, it includes several:

• Rising Innovators for younger founders

• Women Innovators for established founders

• Women Leadership for people shaping the broader innovation ecosystem.

That structure tells you something important. Programs like this are not just recognising success. They are intentionally supporting different stages of founder development.

Funding rarely appears out of nowhere

Across many applications I’ve reviewed, the strongest ones usually show a pattern. The founder didn’t appear suddenly with a fully formed company and a perfect proposal.

There is usually a trail behind them.

A fellowship.
A pilot grant.
An accelerator.
A small program that helped them test the idea.

Each step created a little more evidence.
A little more credibility.
A little more confidence from the next funder.

My journey is testament to this. I started with a small $5,000 grant and that grew to a $1 million grant 18months later. 

Why this matters for you

When founders only focus on the largest funding opportunities, the process can feel incredibly frustrating. Mainly because those programs often expect to see:

• previous delivery

• partnerships

• validation

• some level of traction.

If those signals aren’t there yet, the application can feel like it’s constantly falling short. But when you look at founders who eventually secure larger funding, many of them have built that credibility gradually.

One program led to a pilot. The pilot produced results. Those results strengthened the next application. Over time, a track record forms.

A more useful way to look at opportunities

Instead of asking: "Is this grant big enough to be worth the effort?"

It can sometimes be more helpful to ask: "What validation would this opportunity create?"

For example:

• visibility in a recognised program

• evidence from a pilot project

• partnerships that strengthen credibility.

Those signals don’t disappear after the program ends. They show up again in future applications. And assessors notice them.

The real value of early opportunities

Some of the opportunities founders overlook are actually the ones that make the biggest difference later.

Recognition programs.
Small grants.
Pilot funding.

They might not transform the business overnight. But they help build something extremely valuable over time.

A track record.

And across many funding decisions, a credible track record is one of the strongest signals a founder can bring into the room.